December, 20 2020, 11:00pm EDT

Congress Only Has $600 for COVID Relief but They Managed To Cram in Controversial Changes To Copyright That Threaten Internet Users With Huge Fines
WASHINGTON
Fight for the Future has learned that three controversial changes to copyright law: the CASE Act, Felony Streaming Act, and Trademark Modernization Act are in fact included in the must-pass omnibus spending bill lawmakers will vote on later today (bill text here). Protocol first reported on the potential inclusion of these provisions in the package earlier this month. The CASE Act would threaten ordinary Internet users with up to $30,000 in fines for engaging in everyday activity such as downloading an image and re-uploading it.
More than 20,000 people had called on House and Senate leadership to remove these dangerous and unnecessary provisions from the must-pass bill as part of a campaign launched by digital rights group Fight for the Future, known for their role in the massive 'Internet Blackout' protests that defeated SOPA/PIPA.
Fight for the Future Deputy Director Evan Greer (she/her) issued the following statement:
"This is atrocious. We're facing a massive eviction crisis and millions are unemployed due to the pandemic, but Congressional leaders could only muster $600 stimulus checks for COVID relief, but managed to cram in handouts for content companies like Disney? The CASE Act is a terribly written law that will threaten ordinary Internet users with huge fines for everyday online activity. It's absurd that lawmakers included these provisions in a must-pass spending bill.
We've seen time and time again that changes to copyright law have profound implications for online freedom of expression and human rights. These types of decisions should never be made in closed-door negotiations between politicians and industry or rushed through as part of some must-pass spending package. Artists and musicians especially are suffering immensely during the pandemic. Congress should be working quickly to provide immediate relief, not cramming controversial, poison-pill legislation into budget bills to appease special interests. We call on House and Senate leadership to remove the copyright provisions from the Continuing Resolution and move them through regular order so we can have transparent and open debate about the right balance. DMCA abuse and frivolous copyright takedowns are already a huge problem for the next generation of artists and creators, streamers, gamers, and activists. Lawmakers should be working to address these issues and create a fair system that protects human rights and ensures artists are fairly compensated instead of ramming through poorly crafted legislation that could punish ordinary Internet users for engaging in everyday activities like sharing memes and downloading images online."
Fight for the Future is a group of artists, engineers, activists, and technologists who have been behind the largest online protests in human history, channeling Internet outrage into political power to win public interest victories previously thought to be impossible. We fight for a future where technology liberates -- not oppresses -- us.
(508) 368-3026LATEST NEWS
Whistleblower: Kash Patel's Use of FBI Jets for Personal Travel Delayed Murder Probe
"The FBI cannot afford to have its resources further stretched by a director who views its staff and aircraft as a means to support his jet-setting lifestyle."
Feb 24, 2026
A whistleblower is claiming that FBI Director Kash Patel's frequent use of one of the agency's two jets has led to the delay of a high-profile murder probe.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) on Tuesday revealed he had received new whistleblower disclosures related to his investigations into Patel's use of FBI aircraft for personal travel, and he said they showed Patel's decisions regarding the use of FBI planes had delayed investigations not only into the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk but also the November 2025 mass shooting at Brown University.
In the case of Kirk, Durbin said that the FBI shooting reconstruction team's deployment to Utah "was delayed by at least a day because of a bureau plane and pilot shortage caused by the director's personal flights."
Durbin said that he also received information showing how Patel bungled the aftermath of the Brown shooting by putting the FBI's Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) on standby to respond to the incident.
"The director’s decision caused immediate confusion," Durbin said, "because that order was not communicated to HRT; it upended the responsibility typically assigned to the local field office closest to the incident in question—in this case Boston or New York City—to provide immediate support; and it froze the aircraft’s usage by any other FBI team until the director removed the hold."
Durbin then said that the whistleblower described how his team "had to drive from Quantico, Virginia to Providence, Rhode Island overnight during a winter storm to reach the scene by 9:00 am the following morning to immediately process evidence."
Durbin noted he received this information shortly after Patel was seen chugging down a beer in the locker room of the gold medal-winning US men's Olympic hockey team on Sunday, after the director once again used an FBI plane to fly to Milan, Italy.
The Democratic senator said that Patel's trip to Italy could have seriously hampered the FBI's ability to investigate what may have been an assassination attempt on President Donald Trump.
"It also cannot be ignored that the director’s latest personal jaunt occurred on the same weekend an armed intruder attempted to breach President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence," Durbin explained. "The man was allegedly carrying a gas can and a shotgun, and he was killed on the scene by law enforcement."
Durbin concluded by saying that "the FBI cannot afford to have its resources further stretched by a director who views its staff and aircraft as a means to support his jet-setting lifestyle."
MS NOW reported that an FBI spokesperson has "disputed" the whistleblower's claims that Patel's decisions had caused delays to investigations, but added that they need to "check into the matter more deeply to gather information."
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Trump Imposes New Tariffs, State Lawmakers Demand Direct Refunds for Americans
"Your illegal tariff taxes have created an unprecedented affordability crisis, spiking prices for groceries, cars, clothes, electronics, and countless other household necessities."
Feb 24, 2026
As President Donald Trump plows ahead with his controversial and legally contested tariffs, he faces mounting pressure to refund Americans for duties struck down last week by the US Supreme Court, including in a letter from 21 Democratic state legislators, first reported Tuesday by Common Dreams.
Lawmakers from Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, and Vermont called for a swift response to the high court's "definitive ruling" last Friday that the president's imposition of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) "is illegal, unconstitutional, and amounts to an unauthorized tax on the American people."
"Your illegal tariff taxes have created an unprecedented affordability crisis, spiking prices for groceries, cars, clothes, electronics, and countless other household necessities," the lawmakers noted. "Families across our states have been forced to make impossible choices between paying for food, keeping the heat on, and affording clothing for their children."
"Farmers have lost markets, small businesses have been stretched to the breaking point, manufacturing hasn't returned as you promised, job growth flatlined, layoffs rose, and the economy has slowed to a crawl," they continued. "Your illegal tariffs have been an unmitigated disaster."
The legislators demanded that Trump "work with Congress immediately to provide a refund to American families for the illegal tariff taxes you imposed on them through higher prices on everything, from clothes and cars to electronics and groceries, and which cost families at least $1,700 each last year alone."
"These refunds should go to the American people, not just the businesses who paid the tariffs and passed on their cost to Americans in the form of higher prices, lost wages, and layoffs," they stressed. The lawmakers also demanded that Trump "immediately abide by the court's ruling and stop collecting these illegal tariff taxes," and "cease and desist on any plan or scheme to reimpose the tariffs at issue in the Supreme Court's decision without congressional approval."
The letter was organized by Defend America Action as part of a campaign pushing for tariff refunds and also sent to US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). Its signatories include Colorado Sen. Cathy Kipp (D-14) as well as Illinois Sens. Mary Edly-Allen (D-31) and Graciela Guzmán (D-20).
The other signatories are Democratic Reps. Ken Croken (97) of Iowa; Gary Friedmann (14) of Maine; Noah Arbit (20) and Stephen Wooden (81) of Michigan; Susan Almy (Grafton 17), Tony Caplan (Merrimack 8), and Linda Haskins (Rockingham 11) of New Hampshire; Jo Anne Simon (52) of New York; Arvind Venkat (30) of Pennsylvania; Aftyn Behn (51) Tennessee; Rhetta Andrews Bowers (113), Jessica González (104), Vikki Goodwin (47), Josey Garcia (124), Vincent Perez (77), Ron Reynolds (27), and Gene Wu (137) of Texas; and Will Greer (Bennington 2) of Vermont.
Trump is also facing pressure from Democratic governors and members of Congress in the wake of the high court's ruling. On Monday, US Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—along with 19 other members of the chamber's Democratic Caucus, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY)—unveiled the Tariff Refund Act.
The bill would require US Customs and Border Protection to pay refunds for the $175 billion in unlawfully imposed tariffs within 180 days, prioritizing small businesses. It calls on importers, wholesalers, and large corporations to pass on those refunds to their customers.
On Tuesday, US Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.)—who are all notably not original co-sponsors of that bill—wrote to Trump and highlighted that roughly 95% of the cost from Trump's IEEPA tariffs "was passed on to American families and small businesses in the form of increased costs."
"Any refunds from the federal government should be returned to the millions of Americans and small businesses that were illegally cheated out of their hard-earned money," the trio argued. "Your inability or unwillingness to provide tariff refunds to American families would represent an egregious abdication of your responsibility as president—a giveaway to giant corporations that amounts to theft from the middle class."
In the House of Representatives, Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar (D-Texas) also signaled support for refunds, taking aim at Trump on social media Tuesday morning: "We need our money back. He owes us: $1,700 in illegal tariffs per family; $4 billion he's profited off the presidency; $1 trillion he stole in tax breaks for the ultrarich."
Trump has responded to the Supreme Court's decision by not only lashing out at justices but also doubling down on his mission to impose tariffs. Rather than relying on the IEEPA, Trump is now invoking Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. A 10% tariff took effect on Tuesday, though the president promised over the weekend that he would aim for 15%.
"Every day, I hear from my neighbors how their cost of living is rising rapidly," Venkat, one of the state lawmakers who signed the letter, told Common Dreams. "Whether it's food, utilities, housing, or healthcare, tariffs are driving inflation and a regressive tax."
Venkat said that Trump doubling down on tariffs is "disastrous for my constituents and all Pennsylvanians."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Poll Shows Platner Romping in Dem Primary and Comfortably Ahead of Collins for Maine Senate Seat
"Platner stomping Mills in the primary, then cruising to a double-digit win in the general election... wouldn’t just be a Senate-seat victory but a narrative earthquake," said one writer.
Feb 24, 2026
The progressive candidate Graham Platner has a commanding lead in the Democratic primary for Maine's US Senate seat over the state's centrist Gov. Janet Mills. Come November, he's also much more likely than Mills to defeat the Republican incumbent, Sen. Susan Collins.
The University of New Hampshire's Pine Tree State Poll, released Tuesday morning, showed that Platner has built momentum since October. Five months ago, 58% of likely Democratic voters said the 41-year-old oyster farmer was their first choice to be the state's next senator, compared with 24% who preferred the governor.
Now, with the June primary less than four months away, undecided voters have broken hard in Platner's favor: 64% said he’s their first choice, while Mills has only jumped up to 26%.
It's perhaps an unsurprising result, as Democratic voters overwhelmingly support the kind of economically populist anti-oligarchy politics that Platner—a proponent of Medicare for All and a federal billionaires' tax, with backing from labor unions and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—has unapologetically championed.
But Tuesday's poll suggests his message is not only resonating with Democrats. Where a race between Mills and Collins has the Democrat leading by a single point, within the margin of error, Platner would be expected to win the general election comfortably with 49% of the vote to just 38% for Collins.
The steady shift toward Platner comes as affordability issues have become increasingly salient to Maine voters. A full 35% of voters said that either the cost of living or housing was the most important problem facing Maine.
As President Donald Trump suffers historic unpopularity amid a flailing economy, the most marked shift has been concern about the cost of living. Where just 4% of Mainers said it was their No. 1 issue in March 2025, that number has shot up to 20% this month.
Collins' popularity has been in a dramatic freefall in the era of Trump 2.0, to the point where a late January Morning Consult poll showed her to be the second-least popular US senator, behind only the former longtime GOP leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
While Democratic Party insiders have long argued that voters prefer a safer, moderate candidate when ousting a hated incumbent, observers say Platner's success over the candidate backed by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and much of the party establishment is redefining what it means to be "electable" in a swing state.
"The fatal part of this poll for Mills isn’t even the massive lead Platner has," said Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim. "It’s that he is 10 points more electable against Collins, which is the real priority for Maine voters who don’t want her in office anymore."
New York Times columnist David Wallace-Wells said: "This is a small-sample poll, and there’s a long way to go. But if something like this comes to pass—Platner stomping Mills in the primary, then cruising to a double-digit win in the general election—it wouldn’t just be a Senate-seat victory but a narrative earthquake."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


